IATSS Research 34 (2010) 9–15

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

IATSS Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/wps/locate/iatssr

Improving truck safety: Potential of weigh-in-motion technology

Bernard Jacob a, Véronique Feypell-de La Beaumelle b,⁎
a
LCPC, France
b
OECD/International Transport Forum, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 30 July 2010 Trucks exceeding the legal mass limits increase the risk of traffic accidents and damage to the infrastructure.
They also result in unfair competition between transport modes and companies. It is therefore important to
Keywords: ensure truck compliance to weight regulation. New technologies are being developed for more efficient
Weigh-in-motion (WIM) overload screening and enforcement. Weigh-in-Motion (WIM) technologies allow trucks to be weighed in
Truck the traffic flow, without any disruption to operations. Much progress has been made recently to improve and
Safety implement WIM systems, which can contribute to safer and more efficient operation of trucks.
Road
© 2010 International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Bridge

1. The issues with overloaded trucks
Overloaded trucks pose serious threats to road transport operations,
with increased risks for road users, deterioration of road safety, severe
impacts on the durability of infrastructure (pavements and bridges),
and on fair competition between transport modes and operators.
1.1. Accident risk and accident severity
An overloaded truck is more likely to be involved in an accident,
and have more severe consequences, than a legally loaded truck. The
heavier the vehicle, the higher its kinetic energy, resulting in greater
impact forces and damage – to other vehicles or to the infrastructure –
in the event of a crash. However, the absolute weight is not an issue in
itself and heavy loads can safely be carried by trucks designed for that
purpose, such as the so-called “high capacity vehicles”. However,
when the current load exceeds the maximum permitted limit of a
truck, several adverse consequences may occur:
• Truck instability: an overloaded vehicle is less stable because of the
increased height at the centre of gravity and more inertia of the vehicle
bodies (e.g. trailer or semi-trailer.). Because the on-board stability
tools (ESP, anti-rollover system, etc.) may be overstrained, the risk of
rollover, lane departure or knife-jacking is increased (Fig. 1).
• Braking default: the braking system of any truck is designed for the
maximum allowable weight indicated on the vehicle documents. The
breaking capacity depends on the brakes themselves, but also on the
tire and suspension performances designed for the maximum
allowable weight of the truck. Any weight in excess reduces the
braking capacity of a truck, and may even damage the braking system.
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Veronique.FEYPELL@oecd.org (V. Feypell-de La Beaumelle).
• Loss of motivity and maneuverability: an overloaded vehicle becomes
under-powered; this results in lower speeds on up-hill slopes as
well as the risk of congestion, inefficient engine braking and over
speeding on down-hill slopes. Overtaking also takes longer, and thus
incurs additional risks for the other road users.
• Overloads can induce tire overheat, with a higher risk of tire blow-
outs.
• When flammable goods are transported, overloads increase both the
risk and severity of a fire, due to accident or loss of control of a truck.
Statistics on the load and overload of trucks involved in road
accidents are very scarce because of frequent loss of freight during an
accident, and because weight data are not collected by the police. A
few studies document the increased severity of crashes [8]. In
addition, during weight controls, overloaded trucks are frequently
in default for other violations, e.g. exceeding the driving time, faulty
speed limitation device, etc.
1.2. Damage to the infrastructure
Overloaded trucks present a threat to road safety, but also to
infrastructure, as they increase pavement wear, cracking and rutting,
and thus can contribute to premature pavement failure Heavy trucks
also contribute to bridge fatigue damage. When trucks are overloaded
their aggressiveness may be significantly increased. Extreme bridge
loading cases are also governed by very heavy trucks, either carrying
abnormal loads (e.g. cranes) or illegal overloads. Some weak (old)
bridges with reduced capacity may be severely damaged, or even
destroyed, by overloaded trucks.
In January 1986, during a very cold period (−15 °C), a log truck
skidded on an icy section of road entering the suspended bridge on
the Loire river in France, hitting the parapet and cable anchorage on
the bridge deck. The shock resulted in the collapse of the bridge

0386-1112/$ – see front matter © 2010 International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.iatssr.2010.06.003
10 B. Jacob, V. Feypell-de La Beaumelle / IATSS Research 34 (2010) 9–15
Fig. 1. Truck rollover and knife-jacking.
following the failure of a cable anchorage with low-resilience steel at
the top of a pylon (Fig. 2).
1.3. Economic impact
There are also economical consequences of overloaded trucks.
Overloading leads to large distortions in freight transport competi-
tion, between transport modes (e.g. rail, waterborne and road), and
between road transport companies and operators. In France, it was
estimated that a 5-axle articulated truck, operated at 20% overload all
year round, generated an additional 25 000 € benefit per year.
Overloading also means violation of the taxation rules, such as vehicle
registration fees, axle taxes, and toll infrastructure fees (Figs. 3 and 4).
It is therefore necessary to enforce vehicle weight and dimension
regulations to minimize the number of overloaded and oversized
trucks. The development of advanced truck load monitoring systems,
either on-board or on the road, as part of intelligent transport systems
(ITS), offers important potential and alternative solutions to tradi-
tional roadside enforcement by compliance officers.
2. Traditional enforcement practices: static weighing
Traditional weight limit enforcement procedures are static
weighing. This was the only method approved by the legal metrology
up until the mid 1990s.
Weighbridges, and wheel and axle scales, are used to measure
gross vehicle weight and wheel or axle loads. If axle scales are used,
the gross vehicle weight is obtained by summing the individual axle
loads. If wheel scales are used, an axle load is obtained by summing
Fig. 2. Bridge collapse in Sully-sur-Loire (January 1986) due to a truck accident.
the wheel loads of the same axle. There are three types of static
weighing devices:
• The fixed systems, which are permanently mounted in the
pavement, generally in concrete frames or platforms. This is the
case for all weighbridges and some wheel and axle scales.
• Semi-portable systems, which use permanent grooves and road
installations (electricity supply, connection to the weight recorder,
etc.), but with portable scales which are installed only during the
weighing operations.
• Portable systems, using either wheel or axle scales which are laid on
the pavement surface (e.g. on a parking lot or any weighing area),
and complemented with leveling plates or ramps, in order to get all
the weighed wheels at the same level and in the same plane.
3. Limitations of static weighing
Static weighing suffers from a number of limitations. It requires
staff and time to perform static weighing. Staff is needed to select and
intercept trucks in the traffic flow, to perform the weighing operation
on the static control area, and to fine the violators and apply other
penalties as needed.
It is difficult to safely perform checks on heavily trafficked high-
ways and motorways. With high traffic volume, and the increase on
roads of heavy vehicles, static weighing becomes ineffective and acts
as a limited deterrent. In Europe, it was estimated that the mean time
between two checks of a given truck operated every day was almost
30 years! With such a low probability of being weighed – and the
rather low level of penalties for weight limit violation – the benefit of
overloading was becoming much too high.
Fig. 3. Portable static wheel scales and leveling wood plates.
 B. Jacob, V. Feypell-de La Beaumelle / IATSS Research 34 (2010) 9–15
Fig. 4. Low Speed WIM using load cell wheel scales in a concrete platform (Châlon s/
Saône, France).
Because of the long time required for static weighing, when several
trucks are selected for checking, the weighing area becomes saturated
and thus other overloaded trucks are able to by-pass the check point.
Moreover, static weighing implies delays of 10 to 30 min (sometimes
more), which penalizes truck operators, including the majority of
them who comply with the regulations.
4. Development of weigh-in-motion (WIM)
4.1. Low speed WIM (LS-WIM)
For the reasons described above, and in order to increase the
efficiency of the controls by partially automated weighing, the low
speed WIM concept was developed and implemented. LS-WIM consists
of using wheel or axle scales, mainly equipped with load cells – the most
accurate technology – and installed in concrete or strong asphalt
platforms of at least 30 to 40 m in length. The software of the data
acquisition and processing system is designed to analyze the signal of
the load cells, taking into account the speed, and to accurately calculate
the wheel or axle loads. Such systems are installed either outside the
traffic lanes, on weighing areas, or in toll gates or any other controlled
area. The operating speed is generally in the range of 5 to 15 km/h.
The International Organization for Legal Metrology [7] published
an international recommendation to perform model type approval
tests, and to certify automatic weighing instruments for road vehi-
cles, which applies to LS-WIM systems. LS-WIM has been legally
Fig. 5. HS-WIM bending plates installed in a road section.
11
implemented for enforcement in the UK since 1978, as well as in
several North American States and Canadian and Australian provinces.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, several European countries
(Germany, France, Belgium, etc.) and Japan authorized LS-WIM for
enforcement. The accuracy of LS-WIM systems can be 3 to 5%.
4.2. High speed WIM (HS-WIM)
High speed WIM means that sensors, installed in one or more
traffic lanes, measure axle and vehicle loads while these vehicles are
traveling at normal speed in the traffic flow. HS-WIM allows the
weighing of almost all trucks crossing a road section, and either
individual measurements or statistics to be recorded.
The main advantages of HS-WIM are:
• it is a fully automated weighing system;
• it can record all vehicles — whatever their speed, number of axles, or
time of the day;
• no additional infrastructure is required, and it can be installed on
good pavements and road sections according to the European
specifications of WIM [4];
• it is a reasonable cost system.
HS-WIM systems have some limitations however. The main issue
is the accuracy, which depends highly on the road surface evenness
and pavement characteristics – as well as truck suspension perfor-
mances – because of the dynamic interaction between road and
trucks. In addition, as road sensors are exposed to whole traffic loads
and are mounted on the pavement surface, they may have a limited
lifetime if the pavement failed. A difficult issue is the calibration and
accuracy assessment of HS-WIM systems [1,3]. The accuracy of HS-
WIM systems varies from B(10) to D(25), according to the COST323
European specifications ([4], i.e. 10 to 25% for approximately 95% of
the gross weights. The full range of accuracy classes is A(5) to E(30).
HS-WIM technology can be used [4] for:
• Pavement and bridge engineering, i.e. to record traffic load patterns
which are used for: (i) design code and conventional load models
calibration, (ii) infrastructure monitoring and assessment, in fatigue
or against extreme loads, and (iii) inspection and reinforcement
strategies.
• Traffic data collection, statistics on freight transport, economical
surveys, and sometime road pricing based on real traffic loads and
volume, e.g. the “shadow toll”1;
• Screening overloaded trucks prior to a checking area equipped with
static weighing or LS-WIM devices; an accurate pre-selection in the
traffic flow widely increases the efficiency of the controls and avoids
stopping legally loaded, or empty, vehicles.
5. WIM technologies
WIM systems were introduced in the United States in the mid
1950s. Since then, many developments and progresses have taken
place, while various sensors and techniques have been introduced and
implemented.
5.1. Road sensors WIM systems
5.1.1. Bending and load cell plates
The first WIM sensors were instrumented plates (scales) fixed in a
frame mounted on the road. They were developed and implemented
in the mid 1950s until the late 1970s (Fig. 5). Depending on the plate
1
Shadow toll: an operator is contracted to (build), finance, operate and maintain a
road infrastructure, and is paid at a predefined rate, based on some traffic assumptions.
If the traffic is higher or lower than expected, the contract payment is adjusted to
reflect the real use of the infrastructure.
12 B. Jacob, V. Feypell-de La Beaumelle / IATSS Research 34 (2010) 9–15
width, they can be wheel or axle scales. The advantage of these
sensors is that they get the full tire imprint on the scale at once,
because their extent is longer than the tire imprint length (i.e. at least
40 cm). Thus they are able to measure directly the wheel/axle load.
Moreover, they may be calibrated with standard masses on site, and
thus comply with the traditional metrological requirements for legal
approval [7]. To date, these are the only sensors approved for
enforcement at low speed. At high speed, the accuracy may be B(10)
to C(15) on a smooth pavement.
These plates present major disadvantages, however, such as
requiring extensive civil engineering work for their installation. This
causes some damage to the pavements (large holes or grooves), and
they may be dangerous on heavily trafficked highways if the plate
comes loose. These sensors are forbidden on motorways and main
highways in some areas.
For operational and economical reasons, the current trend is to
abandon progressively the use of plates, and to adopt instead the use
of strip sensors.
5.1.2. Strip sensors
WIM strip sensors were introduced in the early 80s. A strip sensor
consists of a narrow bar, a strip or wire with a section of a few mm2 or
cm2, and a length equal to a traffic lane width (or half of it), mounted in
a groove transversally to the lane (Fig. 6). These sensors measure the
pressure, strain or force variation when a wheel or axle passes over it. A
signal processing algorithm calculates the loads with respect to the
vehicle speed and estimated tire characteristics. There are piezo-
ceramic, piezo-quarz and piezo-polymer strip sensors, and some fiber
optics strips. In the 80s and early 90s, capacitive strips were also used.
The main advantage of these sensors is that they are cheaper than
the plates — particularly when taking into account the installation
cost. They also require less civil engineering work and thus cause less
traffic disturbance and pavement damage. However these sensors do
not measure directly the wheel or axle loads, as the tire imprint
exceeds the size of the sensor surface, and they require an integration
process. Moreover, their behavior and response depends on the
pavement characteristics (above all its modulus). Therefore they are
more sensitive to their environment and conditions of use, and they
cannot be calibrated under a metrological procedure (standard
masses). The accuracy varies from B(10) to D(25).
5.2. New WIM technologies
5.2.1. Multiple sensor (MS-)WIM
If HS-WIM is used for vehicle mass or static axle load estimation,
errors result from the difference between the static wheel or axle
Fig. 6. HS-WIM with piezo-ceramic strip sensors (RN4, eastern of France).
loads and the impact forces applied to the pavement – and thus to the
road sensors – while the vehicle is in motion.
This dynamic effect was studied in detail in the OECD/DIVINE
project [6], and it was shown that, on a good (even or smooth)
pavement, the ratio between the dynamic load and the static load may
reach 1.1 to 1.15 for axle load and gross weight respectively, and up to
1.2 and 1.25 or more on average or rough pavements. Therefore, even
the best WIM sensor cannot accurately measure wheel or axle load –
and thus gross vehicle weight – with accuracy better than this
difference.
For overload detection and enforcement such a tolerance would be
much too high. To cope with this issue, in the late 80s the UK's
Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) suggested the concept of
multiple sensor WIM (MS-WIM), which consists of installing several
road sensors at uniform or non-uniform spacing along a road section
of 10 to 50 m approximately (i.e. a MS-WIM array, Fig. 7). For a given
axle, each sensor will measure the axle load (or force), which varies
with time and distance. The axle is bouncing along the road slightly —
although lift-off only rarely occurs on very rough roads. The sensor
array allows for the multiple measurement of the wheel load.
However, the sensors cannot be installed randomly along the
pavement. Their spacing (if uniformly distributed) needs to take into
account the mean vehicle speed and eigen frequencies to avoid a
sampling frequency (in space) close to the signal frequency. Extensive
works were carried out to calculate optimal sensor spacing (and
numbers) with respect to the vehicle, traffic and road characteristics
and to develop more powerful algorithms for static weight estimation
[2].
There are some design and implementation issues with MS-WIM
systems. The individual sensor accuracy for axle force measurement
and calibration is best established using true axle dynamic loads
rather than static loads − as is usually the case with the traditional
WIM systems. In addition, the sensor response needs to be stable and
independent of the environment, etc. A compromise needs to be
struck between the costs of the MS-WIM array — largely related to the
number of sensors and the accuracy of the system. The accuracy of a
MS-WIM system depends on the quality and number of sensors, the
pavement profile, the algorithm and data processing, and other
parameters. It varies from B + (7) to B(10), and the objective is to
reach the class A(5) for enforcement purpose.
A few MS-WIM arrays were installed, mainly for research and
development works, in the UK, the USA, France and the Netherlands.
Some users are considering using them for accurate pre-selection, and
perhaps in the future for automatic enforcement. However, the issue
of getting a legal metrological type approval for enforcement is not yet
solved for such a system.
Fig. 7. MS-WIM (multiple sensor) array on the A31 motorway (East of France).
 B. Jacob, V. Feypell-de La Beaumelle / IATSS Research 34 (2010) 9–15
Fig. 8. B-WIM: culway in Australia (left), instrumentation (center) and measurement (right) on an integral bridge in Nogent-sur-Seine, France.
5.2.2. Bridge (B-)WIM
The concept of bridge (B-)WIM was introduced [5]. It uses
instrumented bridge parts (e.g. deck, slab or beam) to measure the
strains induced by the moving vehicle loads crossing the bridge. It
then calculates the axle and vehicle loads, using the calculated or
measured transfer function (load to strain) called an influence line (1-
D) or influence surface (2-D). In a B-WIM system, the bridge is used as
a large scale calibrated to weigh axles and vehicles (Fig. 8).
In the early stage (1979–1996), the B-WIM systems required
additional axle detectors mounted in the road pavement or on the
road surface to count the axles, and measure axle spacing and vehicle
speed. The Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) developed the
Culway system, which used box culverts (very short span bridges —
less than 5 m) with excellent damping as a result of having pavement
material over them. Conventional bridges tend to vibrate — creating
an additional strain response that needs to be filtered out to establish
the strain induced by the truck on the bridge. In the WAVE project [2],
it was shown that strain sensors may be sensitive enough to work
without axle detectors, which led to the concept of Free of Axle
Detector (FAD) B-WIM. It improved greatly the interest in this
technology, which avoids any road closure for installation and
maintenance, thus reducing traffic disturbance and increasing safety.
The system is also fully undetectable by drivers; an advantage for
enforcement.
The accuracy of the B-WIM system was initially rather poor for gross
weights, and more so for axles, if detected, and only working on
concrete girder bridges. The accuracy of Culway systems was better and
axles were well detected and rather well weighed. In the WAVE project,
the types of suitable bridges significantly increased with short span slab
integral bridges; short and medium span simply supported slab and
beam bridges, orthotropic steel deck bridges and a few others.
However, the bridge instrumentation needs to be done properly and
requires well trained staff, as well as the calibration of the system. A
Slovenian company developed a marketed B-WIM system (SiWIM).
Another advantage of the B-WIM (SiWIM) is the portability.
Transducers are simply attached, and may be quickly removed and
reinstalled on another bridge. This is also the case with the electronics.
For example, the Swedish Road Administration manages more than 30
bridges with less than 10 systems for non-permanent overload
survey. The technology is valuable in harsh climates, where de-icing
machines may damage any road sensor; or on busy highways and
motorways, where lane closures are difficult and dangerous.
For overload pre-selection and enforcement it is a discrete system;
not visible, and difficult for truck drivers to avoid. However it requires
the presence of a suitable bridge and the technology still requires a
high level of expertise for the installation and operation.
5.2.3. Video-WIM and automatic vehicle identification (AVI)
The concept of video-WIM was developed in North America and
the Netherlands. It involves coupling a WIM system to a video camera
13
with OCR — automatic license plate number recognition (Fig. 9). The
video-WIM system is installed a few kilometers upstream to a
weighing area. If a vehicle passes with an overloaded axle, an overload
on the gross weight, or is even over speeding, pictures of the whole
vehicle – including number plate – are sent to the compliance officers
at the weighing area. The vehicle is then stopped on the weighing area
(e.g. if located after a toll barrier) or is directed to the weighing area.
A new preventive concept was introduced in the Netherlands in
the early 2000s, which consists of recording the pictures of all
suspicious vehicles and storing them in a database managed by the
Ministry of Transport. Even when there is no policing at the weighing
area, the suspected violators are recorded; the Ministry of Transport
then sends warnings to the companies which are most frequently
cited.
6. Data management issues
The use of high speed WIM systems for pre-selection require
telecommunication tools to transmit the data (loads, vehicle
characteristics such as speed, lane used, type of truck, license plate,
etc.) and the pictures, either to the compliance officers or to a
database, for later analysis and use. This requires a high level of
security to protect personal data and road users’ privacy, as well as
prevent mistakes which could lead to court challenges. In several
countries, careful legal procedures are being prepared to implement
such a system. Only authorized officers will be able to access the data,
which generally cannot be stored for too long. However, some
anonymous data (vehicle loads and characteristics without license
plate number, statistics) are often sent to traffic management centres
for operational purposes; and to the policing organization to help plan
enforcement programmes.
Moreover, if there is a static or low speed WIM system adjacent to
a high speed WIM system, it is recommended to use these more
accurate systems to continuously calibrate or check the calibration of
the high speed WIM system in a “closed loop” process.
7. Application of WIM: best practices and implementation
There are various practices around the world in using WIM for
enforcement. In very few countries, such as Taiwan, high speed WIM
systems are used for direct enforcement, with large tolerances to
account for inaccuracies in the system. Tolerances of up to 30% were
reported, but this may be acceptable if there are very large and
frequent overloads (e.g. 20 to 50% of the trucks overloaded, with a
significant amount by more than 50%).
In some countries, portable high speed WIM systems are used over
short time periods to detect overloads, and then to perform static
controls with portable scales. However, the accuracy of portable WIM
systems is not very good, and thus the efficiency or pre-selection is
low.
14 B. Jacob, V. Feypell-de La Beaumelle / IATSS Research 34 (2010) 9–15

Fig. 9. Video-WIM: coupling a HS-WIM and a video camera on a French motorway.

In North America and other countries around the world, high quality
high speed WIM systems are installed in pavements upstream of large
weighing stations (Fig. 10). These weighing stations – along motorways
and highways − are equipped with low speed or static weighing
systems as well as parking lots for enforcement. Many of these high
speed WIM systems weigh very accurately, due to the effort put into
ensuring the weigh pads are absolutely planar with the road surface to
minimize vehicle dynamics — or bounce. The WIM system is generally
used to identify potentially overloaded trucks and divert them to the
weighing area. Depending on the traffic density and the local
organization, the suspicious vehicles are chosen one by one; some
sequences of vehicles are picked when one of them is detected by the
WIM system. If the weigh station is not permanently manned, the WIM
system only records statistics outside the enforcement sessions.
In the Netherlands, France, Sweden, Japan, and some other
countries, the video-WIM was implemented for pre-selection, and
for continuously monitoring overloads and sending warnings to the
transport companies. This procedure has been very efficient in
reducing overloading. Since 2007 a reduction of up to 50% of the
overloads has been observed in some countries; however the
economic crisis and its impact of road freight transport volume has
certainly also contributed to this reduction.

Fig. 10. Overload screening using a HS-WIM and a video camera in Canada.
 B. Jacob, V. Feypell-de La Beaumelle / IATSS Research 34 (2010) 9–15
7.1. Coupling of high-speed and low-speed WIM for pre-selection and
enforcement
Coupling high speed WIM for pre-selection and low speed WIM for
enforcement is already implemented in several countries. The process
could be automated to become more efficient and to require less staff.
That is also the challenge in countries where bribery is an issue. The
automatic self calibration of the HS-WIM system using the low speed
data could also be improved and more automated.
8. Future perspectives
New applications of WIM systems are expected, both for traffic and
heavy vehicle regulation enforcement, and as part of new ITS solutions.
The main objectives of the newly-founded International Society for
WIM (ISWIM: http://iswim.free.fr ) are to support these goals.
8.1. Automatic enforcement in the traffic flow
A great challenge is to use HS-WIM systems for automated (direct)
enforcement in the traffic flow, as is the case for speed enforcement. In
most countries, the requirements are to get WIM systems in accuracy
class A(5) for more than 95% of the vehicles, and even closer to 99%.
However, it is impossible to guarantee 100% of the measurements in
any given tolerance for a large population of trucks traveling at speed
because of the dynamic interaction with the pavement. Therefore the
OIML recommendation does not apply, and legal metrology approval
will be difficult to obtain. However, with the progresses of MS-WIM
and B-WIM, automated enforcement may become a reality. Besides
the technological issues, legal issues will also need to be solved.
8.2. Dynamic load regulation and on board WIM
Weighing trucks in static and in motion, using on board equipment,
was done in the 1980s and ‘90s with instrumented vehicles. Continuous
measurements of wheel and axle impact forces were carried out for
research purposes in a few countries, such as Canada, Finland, and the
UK [6], for pavement and vehicle engineering applications. Most of
these systems used accelerometers and strain gauges mounted on the
vehicle body (suspended masses) and/or on the axles or wheels
(unsuspended masses). The impact forces were calculated using
calibrated vehicle dynamic models. However, this required rather
long calculations, which were often done a posteriori. The instrumen-
tation was costly, and the dynamic calibration of the systems required
sophisticated testing platforms, trained staff, and a long time.
In the OECD/DIVINE project, on-board axle load measurements and
road WIM sensor data collection were synchronized. This opened a new
approach to WIM system calibration, using true dynamic forces applied
on the road sensor. A calibration vehicle was then developed in the
Netherlands for this purpose. Recently, the Australian Road Research
Board (ARRB) tested a system using a laser mounted to the wheel hub
to measure tire deflections and hence wheel loads. This low cost
portable tool is designed to improve the knowledge of the coupling
between dynamic loads and suspension characteristics. The results are
very promising. The availability of accurate lasers, very high speed data
acquisition and processing technology was the key to this success.
On-board static weighing systems have been used in the trucking
industry for many years. They were developed by truck or tire
manufacturers, and by metrological companies. A number of technol-
ogies and patents are reported which correspond to a market for
hauliers and fleet managers (e.g. garbage trucks in cities and logging
trucks). The main objective is to optimize truck fleet management and
routing with respect to their capacity and load limits.
Recently, road operators and enforcement bodies have expressed
the need for on-board weighing systems, which could be installed on
all trucks in the future to monitor and enforce load limits, as done with
15
the chronotachygraphe (a device which measures and records the
driving time all along the journey). Coupled with a GPS, an on-board
weighing system could meet the needs of hauliers, fleet managers,
road managers and enforcement bodies. The current marketed
systems weigh the vehicle when it is stationary — such as at traffic
lights, in queues, in gas stations, or parking lots during rest periods.
They weigh only the mass above the sensors, and their accuracy is
pretty much dependent on the operator and their calibration.
Significant investments are being made in Australia to have on-
board mass measurement equipment which is tamper proof and of an
evidentiary standard. A recent review found a viable and experienced
on-board mass monitoring industry in Australia, where the current
systems were built as an aid to the driver. The systems use both load
cells and air pressure transducers. In recent times, telematics service
providers have entered the industry, bringing the on-board mass
product to a wider industry base. The review concluded that there
were many areas that needed to be addressed in order to ensure
accuracy and to prevent tampering with the mass parameters.
On board WIM systems seem to be a promising alternative, both to
cover the same needs and to address new challenges. On-board WIM
systems may be part of an advanced driving assistance (ADAS) to
prevent large dynamic amplifications on rough or deteriorated pave-
ments by a variable speed adaptation (to the road profile and the vehicle
dynamic characteristics). This would improve road safety and vehicle
comfort, as well as reduce road wear because of the dynamic load factors.
In a longer term future, if the trucks can be equipped with reliable
on-board WIM systems the driving law could be modified to not only
limit the (static) masses of the vehicles, but also their impact on the
roads (i.e. the dynamic impact forces). In a first stage, that could be
done on a voluntary basis with incentives such as tax reduction, or an
increase in the static load limits. A main advantage would be to
monitor and record continuously the loads, and to allow after the
event checks and fines if needed. Real time overload monitoring could
also be possible using a data transmission system and a GPS;
necessary to stop the highest overloaded trucks.
9. Conclusions
WIM is a useful tool to contribute towards more compliance with
mass regulation. It has been used most successfully for nearly two
decades. WIM has helped to reduce the number of overloaded trucks,
and contributed to the more efficient and effective use of police
officers’ time. A reduction in overloaded trucks is also conducive to a
reduction in crashes. There are still issues and challenges for WIM
technology and application which require more research and
development work. It is also essential to better disseminate
knowledge and best practices, to exchange experiences, and carry
out large scale common tests of WIM sensors and systems.
References
[1] ASTM, Standard Specification for Highway Weigh-In-Motion (WIM) Systems with
User Requirements and Test Methods, ASTM Standard E 1318, Jan 10, 2002.
[2] B. Jacob, Proceedings of the Final Symposium of the project WAVE (1996-99), Paris,
May 6-7, 1999, Hermes Science Publications, Paris, 1999 352 pp.
[3] B. Jacob, E.J. O'Brien, W. Newton, Assessment of the Accuracy and Classification of
Weigh-in-Motion Systems: Part 2 European Specification, International Journal of
Vehicle Design - Heavy Vehicle Systems 7 (Nos. 2/3) (2000) 153–168.
[4] Jacob, B. O'Brien, E.J. and Jehaes, S. (2002), Weigh-in-Motion of Road Vehicles, Final
Report of the COST323 Action, LCPC, Paris, 538 pp., + French edition (2004).
[5] F. Moses, Weigh-In-Motion System using instrumented Bridges, ASCE Transpor-
tation Engineering Journal 105 (1979) 233–249.
[6] OECD (1998), Dynamic Interaction between Vehicle and INfrastructure Experiment,
Technical report, DSTI/DOT/RTR/IR6(98)1/FINAL, OECD, Paris, 151 pp
[7] OIML, International Recommendation: Automatic instruments for weighing road
vehicles in motion and measuring axle loads, Part 1: Metrological and technical
requirements – Tests, R134-1, 2006.
[8] D. Turner, L.A. Nicholson, K. Agent, Oversize/overweight commercial vehicle safety,
Paper presented at the HVTT10 International Conference on Heavy Vehicles, Paris,
19-22 May 2008, 2008.